Temperature-compensated resonance ( was Re: [sdiy] RE: [AH]

[David G. Dixon]

Cheater, do you have a specific point to make, or are you simply arguing for
the sake of arguing?  I've been following this thread, trying to glean
something useful out of it which might help me build better synthesizers,
but so far I'm coming up empty.  Yes, we're all fairly certain that Cary has
not taken the time to finish that double-blind statistical study on the
preferences of audio recording engineers to temperature-compensated Q (for
shame, Cary, for shame!).  Why are we supposed to care again?


> -----Original Message-----
> From: synth-diy-bounces at dropmix.xs4all.nl [mailto:synth-diy-
> bounces at dropmix.xs4all.nl] On Behalf Of cheater cheater
> Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 11:44 AM
> To: Cary Roberts
> Cc: synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> Subject: Re: Temperature-compensated resonance ( was Re: [sdiy] RE: [AH]
> 
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 20:03, Cary Roberts <cary.roberts at retrosynth.net>
> wrote:
> >>Professional recording engineers need repeatability. They need to be
> >>able to recall a mixing session years later, because a new mixdown can
> >>be worth 6-7-8 figures. A difference of 0.5 dB can make or break a
> >>mix, especially a complex one. It is very difficult to fix this if you
> >>have 120 stems. Do you think temperature drift is acceptable in that
> >>situation?
> >
> > Temperature drift doesn't matter because capacitor aging will have
> changed
> > the signal path far more than temperature differences.
> 
> Depends on how your gear was made. There are simple measures against
> this. Especially with the high performance/resilience capacitors
> available today.
> 
> > Also disagree with
> > your assertion about repeatability.  Some of my EQs have switched gain
> but
> > not much else in the signal path does.  Does it matter that my one or
> two
> > octave bandwidth EQ gain is off a little when I can't repeat the gain
> and
> > thresholds on the compressors, line amps, or anything else?  Probably
> not.
> 
> This only says something about *your* gear, not about equipment in
> general. Suggest you browse around the manley or avalon catalog. But
> then those things cost, for example, 20000 usd upwards per channel,
> and are used by mastering engineers; your mixing/project studio
> doesn't need or have this. So why argue nobody needs something by
> proving that *you* don't need it?
> 
> This is relevant: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/biased-
> sample.html
> 
> 
> > People that want recall do their mixing in their DAW these days and use
> > outboard only for sweetening or during tracking.  But good luck to them
> in
> > five years when they can no longer open their DAW files.
> 
> I'm sure you've done a lot of statistics here, sarcastically speaking.
> Again you are trying to disprove in general a statement that can be
> true or false from instance to instance by showing single examples.
> Bear in mind that what you have experienced is not end-all be-all and
> people have different techniques of doing things. The existence of
> fully digital signal paths does not invalidate previous approaches;
> sometimes it can just enforce them. But to answer your argument: no,
> DAWs are not always used for mixing and people will use Protools with
> Euphonix to automate their analogue mixers with motorized faders.
> There is a lot of talk about analogue summation. Protools is then used
> just as a hard disk recorder and recall happens through the analogue
> hardware, in which situation again it is important not to have a lot
> of temperature dependency.
> 
> > I'll stick to my recall sheets and analog gear thank you.
> >
> >>To turn your question on you, how many of your equalizers state the
> >>temperature dependency of different parameters?
> >
> > Zero, and I wouldn't buy something that stated such.  The only items I
> care
> > for which I care about temp stability are my VCOs and tracking filters.
> 
> So *you* don't care about it, and are therefore using this to prove
> that *nobody* cares about it? Do you see the problem here? A sort of
> egoistic view of the world, and this - according to basic predicate
> logic - disallows you from proving your point. The arguments and
> experience you have provided are completely and utterly subjective and
> biased.
> 
> Compare: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/hasty-
> generalization.html
> 
> D.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy